Tag Archives: Islamic Society of North America

Post navigation

The Obama White House has finally released the names of the fourteen Muslim “leaders” who met with the President this past week. Among the group — which included a comedian, along with a hijab-wearing basketball player and a handful of left wing activists — were a select few individuals with disturbingly close ties to the global Muslim Brotherhood.

As previously uncovered by Breitbart News, the White House confirmed that Azhar Azeez, President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), was one of the Muslim leaders that met with President Obama. ISNA was founded in 1981 by members of the Muslim Brotherhood. The group was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial. Federal prosecutors have previously described how ISNA funneled its money to Palestinian terrorist group Hamas (via Investigative Project):

ISNA checks deposited into the ISNA/NAIT account for the HLF were often made payable to “the Palestinian Mujahadeen,” the original name for the HAMAS military wing. Govt. Exh. 1-174. From that ISNA/NAIT account, the HLF sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to HAMAS leader…

Azeez’s bio also reveals him as a founding member the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) Dallas/Fort Worth Chapter. CAIR has also allegedly funneled money to Palestinian terror groups and was also started by members of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In October, 2014, Azeez signed a letter endorsing Sharia Islamic governance. Under the Sharia, non-Muslims are treated as second-class citizens. The Sharia also endorses the hudud punishments in the Koran and Hadiths, which state that apostasy from Islam is punishable by death.

Hoda Elshishtawy of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) was also in attendance at the Muslim leaders’ meeting with President Obama.

MPAC, just like CAIR and ISNA, was founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood. The group has written and often endorsed a paper rejecting the United States’s designation of Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorist organizations, and has insisted that the Jewish state of Israel be added as a state sponsor of terrorism. The group’s former president, Salam al-Marayati, has publicly encouraged officials to look at Israel as a suspect in the 9/11/01 attacks.

He has said that Hezbollah’s attacks against Israel should be seen as “legitimate resistance.” In a 1998 speech at the National Press Club, an MPAC senior official described the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah as one that fights for “American values.” In an MPAC-sponsored March 2009 protest to “Defend al-Aqsa Mosque and al-Quds,” participants could be heard chanting slogans encouraging Palestinians to wipe out Israel. “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” demonstrators chanted.

Mohamed Majid, who serves as Imam of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS), was also in attendance at the White House meeting with the President, and senior advisors Ben Rhodes and Valerie Jarrett.

In 2002, ADAMS was raided as part of a U.S. government initiative called “Operation Green Quest,” where federal agents suspected the group of supporting terrorist organizations. Government documents said that the ADAMS Center was “suspected of providing support to terrorists, money laundering, and tax evasion.”

Majid is also an official with the brotherhood-affiliated Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

He also signed the October 2014 letter, along with White House meeting attendee Azhar Azeez, insisting that Sharia law should be an acceptable political system worldwide.

It remains unclear why President Obama remains a stalwart believer that the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates should be treated as legitimate political entities, when history reveals the organization as one with radical goals. The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Islamic cleric (and Hitler admirer) Hassan al-Banna after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

The group seeks as its end-game to install a Sunni Islamic caliphate throughout the world. al-Banna said of his organization’s goals, “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.” Both Former Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden and ISIS “caliph” Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi were members of the Brotherhood. Its current spiritual leader, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, has a knack for bashing Jews and praising Nazis. The Muslim Brotherhood’s motto remains: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

The Point de Bascule blog has discovered that three directors of the National Council of Canadian Muslims, formerly known as the Council on American-Islamic Relations-Canada (CAIR-Canada), have endorsed the Muslim Brotherhood and its ideology.

Current NCCM director Khadija Haffajee has held official positions with the Islamic Society of North America, which the U.S. Justice Department says is a Muslim Brotherhood entity. The Canadian chapter of ISNA lost its charitable status last year because of evidence that it is funding Pakistani terrorists and major accounting issues.

Haffajee joined ISNA’s board of directors in 1997 and won additional terms in 2001 and 2004. During that time, she was on the editorial advisory board of ISNA’s Islamic Horizons magazine. As Point de Bascule found out, a 1999 issue put Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna on the cover with the heading, “A Martyr of Our Times.”

The article, published under Haffajee’s supervision, described him as a “true guide” and “martyr of da’wah who offered the Eternal Message.” The author, Osman Abdel-Magid Ahmed, recalls meeting al-Banna when he was 13 years old and being “mesmerized” with his “describing the gallantry of the mujahideen in Palestine and their martyrdom.”

It portrays al-Banna as pro-democratic but, while he approved of elections, he wanted democracy to be within the limited confines ofsharia. The article says he “chided the government, the parliamentarians and the ulema [Muslim legal scholars] to implement Islamic laws in the country.”

He preached that “it was unjustified that laws governing the Muslim people should contradict the teachings of Islam and the rules enshrined in these two sources,” specifically sharia’s standards on penal, civil and commercial law.

The ISNA piece implied that it wants to assume al-Banna’s mantle, stating: “It is hard to imagine that we will easily find someone to fill al-Banna’s place, but at least a collective leadership should emerge to take on that task.”

The women’s rights catastrophe in the Muslim world has reached America. Islamist groups and preachers in the U.S. are directly legitimizing the abuse of women or indirectly through advocacy of sharia law, and Muslims and non-Muslims, men and women, must hold them accountable.

Exhibit A is the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA), a group based in California that fashions itself as an authoritative voice of matters of Islamic law. It issues fatwas, or religious declarations, in response to questions from Muslims seeking guidance. Its website has a fatwa bank that will shock anyone concerned about women’s rights.

A fatwa published in 2010 justifies the practice of female genital mutilation:

“Some extremists from the West and their devout followers in the Muslim world would like to brand all circumcision as female genital mutilation (FGM) … all of their propaganda about female circumcision is no more than bigotry.”

“As for the issue of forcing a wife to have sex, if she refuses, this would not be called rape, even though it goes against natural instincts and destroys love and mercy, and there is a great sin upon the wife who refuses.”

One reason AMJA advises Muslims against joining law enforcement is because they “might have to arrest a Muslim man whose wife said he ‘raped’ her or forced her.” Another reason is the possibility of “gender mixing.”

AMJA is not a fringe organization whose influence is limited to the walls of its headquarters.

AMJA’s Fatwa Committee includes Dr. Muwaffak Al-Ghaylany, the President of the League of Imams in North America and Imam of the Islamic Center of Grand Blank City in Michigan.

Another AMJA Fatwa Committee member is Dr. Waleed Al-Maneese, Vice President of the Islamic University of Minnesota and president of the board of trustees of Dar al-Farooq Islamic Center. He is also on the board of trustees of the North American Imams Federation.

These are just four AMJA officials. Its website’s “Our Experts” section lists 47 preachers around the world, mostly residing in America. It also separately lists 41 AMJA members.

“[I]n some cases a husband may use some light disciplinary action in order to correct the moral infraction of his wife, but this is only applicable in extreme cases and it should be resorted to if one is sure it would improve the situation. However, if there is a fear that it might worsen the relationship or may wreak havoc on him or the family, then he should avoid it completely,” Siddiqi is quoted as saying.

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) announced in January that its Director of Chaplaincy Services conducted what it described as a “historic visit” to Oahu, Hawaii where he met with senior Chaplains and key leaders spanning seven military bases and including service members from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard. According to the announcement:

The visit included several office calls with senior Chaplains and key leaders spanning seven bases and including Service Members from Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard. His visit highlighted the importance of religious support to Service Members and overall resilience for Service Members and their families. The visit culminated with a traditional Friday sermon and community dinner held at the Chapel Annex at Schofield Barracks.

ISNA Chaplaincy Services Director Abdul-Rasheed Muhammad meeting with military chaplains and service members. The endorser also made a courtesy visit with the 8th Military Police Brigade’s Commander COL Mark Jackson the commanding officer of the only Muslim Chaplain in the Pacific Region CH (MAJ) Ibraheem Raheem. COL Jackson’s history as a visionary for risk reduction and health promotion was a common passion for CH (LTC) Ret. Muhammad who served in the US Army Public Health Command during the development of the ACE program for suicide prevention and awareness.

Highlights of the visit were:

1) Reaching out to women service members in the form of a town hall forum to address the unique needs of women in the faith

3) Building and maintaining relationships with senior Chaplains and key leaders to ensure the best possible support in terms of resources, opportunities for worship and information distribution to Muslim personnel”

In February, ISNA reported that two ISNA-endorsed chaplains were selected for active duty for the first time in 15 years.

In 2010, our predecessor publication reported on the controversy involving ISNA leader Louay Safi when it was learned that the US Defense Department brought him to Fort Hood as an instructor and that he had been lecturing on Islam to US troops in Fort Hood who were about to deploy to Afghanistan. In February 2010, the activities and lectures of Dr. Safi on all military bases were suspended pending a criminal inquiry by the U.S. military. A shooting took place at Fort Hood near Killeen, Texas on November 5, 2009 in which a single gunman killed 13 people and over 30 people were injured in the worst shooting ever to take place on an American military base. The only suspect in the shooting is Nidal Malik Hasan, a 39-year-old U.S. Army major serving as a psychiatrist. The outcome of the criminal inquiry does not appear to have been reported.

Shoulder-to-Shoulder, an interfaith coalition allied with the Islamic Society of North America, is mobilizing its supporters against state legislation that stops foreign law from superseding the Constitution. The Islamists’ non-Muslim allies are helping frame it as an unnecessary, bigoted initiative that threatens all people of faith.

The coalition is holding a webinar on February 27. The announcement correctly notes that current legislation does not mention Shariah, though it is covered under the terminology of “foreign law.” Seven states have passed such bills since 2010.

Shoulder-to-Shoulder’s description makes it sound like the legislation is a ban on foreign law influencing judges’ decision altogether. It states:

“Most religious laws that influence these contracts (like Jewish Halakha, Catholic Canon law, or Islamic Shariah law) were not developed within the United States and would be considered foreign law under such legislation. While anti-Muslim sentiment is still the motivating factor behind these laws, Americans of every faith should be concerned about their impact on religious freedom.”

This is an easily refutable misrepresentation of the bills, based on the American Laws for American Courts draft legislation. It does not ban religious contracts like those mentioned by Shoulder-to-Shoulder, nor is it a blanket ban on foreign law. It only applies when there is a conflict between the U.S. Constitution and foreign law in court and it victimizes no one, especially not Muslims because Muslim-Americans are benefactors of it.

A 2011 study found 50 cases where Shariah or foreign law based on Shariah influenced the court case. The American Public Policy Alliance has a list of 10 cases where a Muslim-American party objected to the role of Shariah. The summary is as follows:

ALAC is sometimes criticized as unnecessary and driven by unsubstantiated paranoia. It is hard to imagine that an American judge would ever rule give foreign law precedence over American law. The American Public Policy Alliance explains that the bill fixes a troublesome loophole:

Most states merely state that foreign laws and judgments that violate the state’s “public policy” shall not be recognized. But the courts consistently rule that the state legislature has the responsibility to articulate clearly what the state’s public policy actually is.

The ALAC website points out the hypocrisy of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. In response to business dress codes enforced on Muslim-American women in France, CAIR communications director Ibrahim Hooper unwittingly supported the rationale behind ALAC.

“A discriminatory dress code implemented in France does not supersede American laws protecting the religious rights of American citizens,” he said. He said CAIR is “defending American law from foreign intrusion.”

The American-Islamic Forum for Democracysupports ALAC-type bills because it has seen how Shariah has affected Muslims in Europe. The bills’ purpose is not to pre-empt a hypothetical situation. It’s a reaction to what is actually happening right now.

A 2010 study found that Shariah courts in the United Kingdom lack accountability, to say the least. There are not clear standards for appointing judges and monitoring proceedings and rulings often conflict with British law. For example, British courts’ first priority is the interest of the child. Shariah courts rule that children automatically go into the custody of the father after a certain age.

The British Justice Ministry investigated Shariah courts and had to end give up because of a lack of cooperation from the court staffs.

The misrepresentations by Shoulder-to-Shoulder stem from its relationship with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. The Foundation was another Brotherhood entity that was shut down for financing Hamas. This isn’t six degrees of separation: The Holy Land Foundation operated within ISNA, according to a 2009 ruling by a federal judge.

ISNA said on its website last month that it “founded” Shoulder-to-Shoulder to counter increasing bigotry against Muslims. Elsewhere on its website, ISNA saysit “helped convene” the coalition of 28 religious organizations. Whichever way it is worded, the point is that Shoulder-to-Shoulder is largely a product of ISNA.

And who is the ISNA official leading its interfaith campaign and, therefore, its work with Shoulder-to-Shoulder? Former Secretary-General Sayyid Syeed, who is seen in The Grand Deception documentary saying in 2006, “Our job is to change the constitution of America.” His current job title at ISNA is National Director of ISNA’s Office of Interfaith and Community Alliances.

Sixty-nine years ago this month, Nazi Germany mounted its last, horrific offensive in the dead of winter in what came to be known as the Battle of the Bulge. Perhaps taking a page from the playbook of their fellow totalitarians, the Muslim Brotherhood seems to have its own audacious winter offensive underway – only this one is being waged inside America, a country the Brothers have declared they seek “to destroy from within.”

At the moment, the object of this exercise appears to be to prevail on the U.S. government to do what it did once before: help install a Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt. The difference, of course, is that the last time was in the heyday of the so-called “Arab Spring,” a moment when the ambitions of Egyptian Islamists and those of their counterparts in Tunisia, Libya, Syria and elsewhere were temporarily obscured by disinformation and wishful thinking.

In short order, however, the determination of the Muslim Brotherhood and its ilk to impose the supremacist and brutally repressive doctrine they call shariah became evident in Cairo and the rest of the Middle East. Whether they gained power via violent revolution or through the ballot box, the goal was the same: compel moderate Muslims, secularists, Christians and everybody else to submit to orthodox Islamic misrule. Resistance was met with violence, imprisonment and the destruction of churches.

Fortunately, as many as thirty million Egyptians took to the streets of their cities last summer to denounce the Brotherhood and demand the removal from power of its president, Mohamed Morsi. He was overthrown and arrested in July by the military-led opposition, his organization banned and its other leaders incarcerated. Most sentient Americans recognized this as a very positive development.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s operatives, front organizations and allies in this country have nonetheless demanded Morsi’s restoration. They present themselves as champions of democracy, hoping no one will notice the practical effect of the Brothers’ policies when in power: a state in which elections amount to nothing more than one man, one vote, one time.

The Brotherhood’s advocates enjoy considerable access to and influence with the Obama administration. For example, the President and his subordinates take counsel from Homeland Security Department advisors like Mohamed Magid, the president of this country’s largest Muslim Brotherhood front, the Islamic Society of North America, and Mohamed Elibiary, an Islamist community organizer based in Plano, Texas. At the urging of their ilk, Mr. Obama cut off military sales to the Egyptian government a few months ago. In addition to needlessly alienating Cairo when it is rolling up our mutual enemies, he thus created an opportunity for Vladimir Putin to pick up the slack and, in the process, further reestablish Russia in the Middle East.

The Muslim Brotherhood in this country (the subject of a free ten-part online course at www.MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com) is evidently determined to do even more for their fellow jihadists in Egypt. Hence, they have created new fronts to promote Egyptian “democracy” and held lobbying and fundraising events in several U.S. cities featuring top Brotherhood personalities.

As the indispensable Investigative Project on Terrorism first reported, one of those is Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna. Ramadan was allowed into the United States in January 2010 at the direction of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose longtime aide, Huma Abedin, also has extensive personal and family ties to the Brotherhood.

Even more outrageous is the presence at several of these events – including one in the House Cannon Office Building on December 5th – of Sami Al-Arian. Al-Arian would seem an unlikely choice to sell Congress on so dubious a proposition as restoring the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt. After all, he not only engaged in what the Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad” in the United States. That’s the stealthy subversion Islamists employ until they are able to use violence to foist shariah worldwide.

Sami al-Arian was also convicted in 2006 of aiding Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a designated terrorist group he led for many years. PIJ has been responsible for murders of innocents in the past and applauded a bus bombing in Israel just last Sunday. Why on earth would Judge Leonie Brinkema allow Al-Arian, who is awaiting disposition of contempt of court charges and faces possible deportation, to collaborate and agitate with his fellow Muslim Brothers, albeit with a location-monitoring bracelet?

It is obscene that anyone in Congress would host such a jihadist. Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN), a Muslim legislator who sponsored the event at which Al-Arian appeared, claims not to have known that he would be there. True or not, he and President Obama have certainly failed to recognize the Muslim Brotherhood for the enemy it is.

That failure makes all the more dangerous the Muslim Brotherhood’s present offensive. As we mark the anniversary of the bloody and avoidable Battle of the Bulge, we would do well to reflect upon an event held last month at the Brotherhood beachhead at Georgetown University, the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. Among those invited to promote a “return to democracy” in Egypt was a featured guest speaker named Rami Jan, who happens to be a member of the Egyptian Nazi party.

The 26-page Special Report includes a detailed chronology, identifies specific Islamic propaganda organizations, and identifies five top “Islamist influence operators” associated with the Obama administration. More than 12 years of Judicial Watch work on national security issues is featured in the Special Report, highlighting information from government documents exclusively obtained by the organization.

If you would like to receive weekly emails updating you about all of our efforts to fight corruption, please sign up here.The heavily footnoted Report centers on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) purge of anti-terrorism training material and curricula deemed “offensive” to Muslims. The curricula purge – documented through a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in June 2013 – occurred following a February 8, 2012, meeting between FBI Director Robert Mueller and various Islamic organizations. According to the Report, the purge was part of a “broader Islamist influence operation” designed to “influence the opinions and actions of persons, institutions, governments and the public at-large.” The Report also documents incidents of “Islamic influence operations” at the Departments of Justice and State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Obama White House.

According to the Report, during the February 8 meeting, FBI Director Mueller assured the Islamic groups in attendance that the agency had ordered the removal of presentations and curricula on Islam from FBI offices around the country that were deemed “offensive.” One group that met with Mueller – the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) – had been named by the government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist financing lawsuit, along with the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

The Report lists the reasons given by the FBI for purging “offensive” training documents:

January 2012: U.S. Military Academy at West Point cancels an address by a highly decorated founding member of Delta Force and former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Jerry Boykin, after complaints from the Hamas front group CAIR.

July 2012: Top DOJ Civil Rights official refuses to vow to Congress not to push Saudi-style blasphemy laws.

September 2012: Obama administration blames attacks on U.S. Embassy Cairo and the “Special Mission Compound” in Benghazi on a YouTube movie trailer.

According to the Report, “The Obama administration has been penetrated by Islamist influence operators, seeking to advance an ideological agenda completely at odds with our constitutional system. The penetration is, in many cases, by the Obama administration’s invitation. Some of the more public and controversial figures associated with the Obama administration have included:

“Rashad Hussain – U.S. Special Envoy to the OIC … has a history of participating in events connected with the Muslim Brotherhood.

“Huma Abedin – Long-time personal aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton [whose] late-father, mother and brother are all connected to Muslim Brotherhood organizations or operatives.

“Daliah Mogahed – An advisor to the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Mogahed’s 2009 book Who Speaks for Islam? is viewed by many as an apologia for the growing power and influence of radical Islamists. Mogahed is an unapologetic defender of unindicted terrorist conspirator organizations such as CAIR and ISNA.

“Momamed Elibiary – A Texas-based security consultant and Islamic cleric who was named to President Obama’s Homeland Security Advisory Council in 2010. He has close ties to a convicted Hamas fundraiser and other radical Islamist causes ….

“Mohamed Magid – … President of the ISNA, an unindicted terrorist conspirator organization. Magid was appointed by President Obama to the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working Group. From that position, Magid was key in influencing and directing the purge of training materials and policies in the FBI and other federal agencies.”

The Report concludes, “It is fair to say that not a single U.S. government employee goes to work each morning with the mission of identifying and defeating the Islamists’ active measures campaigns. Large bureaucratic institutions are reluctant to ‘disturb’ operations with examinations for deception and manipulation. Those same organizations are loath to raise those subjects in congressional appropriations requests and hearings fearing any political criticism. Until there is someone with the job of defeating the Islamist active measures campaign targeting our nation – and resourced to roll back the Islamists and win – the United States and her citizens are in grave peril.”

America has often and fruitlessly held forth the hand of friendship and equal freedom to Muslims abroad and here in the United States, but the greatest majority of Muslims (70%) reject equal liberty, equal justice and equal rights in favor of Islamic “fiqh” or Sharia law, and since before 1993 and the first attack on the World Trade Center, Muslims have significantly increased their Islam-inspired terror plots and attacks on U.S. soil. First and second generation U.S. Muslims have turned against our nation, a fact many of us have known for years but one that the ‘Tennessean’ and the ‘New York Times’ seemingly just discovered last week. And, the Muslim Brothers continue to infiltrate the upper echelons of the U.S. government, while only a handful of our state and local leaders, Congressmen and Senators seem to have any real concern over the emerging islamoNazi threat to the United States.

Last week, Mr Pete Doughtie, editor of ‘The Rutherford Reader’, called for Muslims to be deported from the U.S., especially members of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Mr Doughtie fully understands the subversive tactics used by CAIR and the MB; his solution is both necessary and supported by the facts.

CAIR has a long history of associating with felons in terrorism probes, suspected terrorists and convicted terrorists. The list is long and includes Nihad Awad, CAIR’s director; Ghassan Eli, who was convicted in April of 2005 on charges of conspiracy to deal in the property of a specially designated terrorist; and Randall “Ismail” Royer of Virginia Jihad infamy, who was convicted of conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States and weapons violations.

Closer scrutiny of a few Muslim Brotherhood members, who follow the credo “Jihad is our way and death in the cause of Allah is our dream”, reveals a picture indicative of thousands of others operating within all levels of the U.S. government throughout America. Their views on Sharia law and terrorism should have precluded any entry level position in the U.S. government.

Azizah al-Hibri was appointed by Obama to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. She has stated that Islamic law, the harshest on earth, is more moral than the U.S. code of law, because it accepts “blood money” from murderers. She has also made appearances with a top Al Qaeda fundraiser, Abdurhaman Alamoudi, now serving 23 years in prison.

Rashad Hussain is the Special Envoy to the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC). He is held in high esteem by Sharia law advocates, because he has memorized the Koran. And bear in mind, the OIC, headquartered in Jeddah-Saudi Arabia, is dedicated to spreading Sharia law globally.

Obama’s “Sharia Czar” is Imam Mohammed Magid, and he is also the president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. His father, Al-Haj Majd Haj Mosa, is a Cairo-trained MB scholar, and he was once the top cleric in the Republic of Sudan, one of the most Sharia compliant nations in the world.

After a wide-sweeping terror finance investigation in March 2002, Customs Agent David Kane testified that the All Dulles Muslim Society Center (ADAMS), led by Mohammed Magid, was being used to launder hundreds of thousands of dollars for the targeted finance network that shared offices with the ADAMS Center. Eleven ADAMS Center officials were also targets of this investigation.

Former Islamic Center of Murfreesboro (ICM) board member, Mossad Rawash, was a staunch supporter of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), much like Sami al-Arian. Arian was a tenured professor at the University of South Florida, until he was indicted on terror support charges after 9-11-01 and his leadership role in the PIJ was discovered. On November 3, 2013, the ICM featured a roving board member of the ISNA, Jamal Badawi, who is also a terrorist supporter and an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Conspiracy. Saleh Sbenaty, MTSU professor and ICM spokesperson, is a member of the MB. So…Yes!…the Federal Bureau of Investigation should be looking deep into the finances of the ICM.

On December 1, the ‘Tennessean’ put forth a ridiculously low figure of “20 American citizens”, who have joined Islamic terrorist organizations in order to participate in the numerous wars across the Middle East and North Africa, which would only account for the young Somali-American men who went to Somalia last year to join al-Shabaab. There are hundreds of well documented cases of American and European Muslims joining jihadist causes and “holy wars”, from the 1980s and Afghanistan up to this year in Mali. And just as battle-hardened jihadists returned from their “holy war” against the Soviets to fight in Serbia for a separate Islamic state, America can one day expect American Muslims returning from service in Al Qaeda, al-Shabaab, Islamic Jihad, the Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria to foment rebellion, increase their practice of terrorism on U.S. soil and attempt to establish a separate Islamic state within the United States.

And let us not forget the ordinary Muslims living in America, like Basit Sheikh, a legal resident of North Carolina, who was arrested last month by the FBI, as he attempted to leave for Lebanon in order to join Jabhat al-Nusrah, a terrorist organization. Do not forget the two Iraqi men living in public housing in Bowling Green, KY since 2009, who were discovered to be Iraqi Al Qaeda terrorists with the blood of U.S. soldiers on their hands.

Pete Doughtie is in good company, since journalist Andy McCarthy and Frank Gaffney, ex-deputy assistant Defense Secretary, have both called for precluding Muslims from Muslim majority nations and “sharia-adherent Muslims” from the U.S., just as we banned advocates for communism after WWII. After the Boston Marathon Bombing, Laura Ingraham, FoxNews contributor, called for a ban on Muslim immigration, and several U.S. Senators, such as Rand Paul, suggested much the same.

“Who will stand up”, asked Mr Doughtie.

We all should be standing shoulder to shoulder in a movement to deport all Muslims not holding U.S. citizenship, much as I have advocated since 1993. Some of us should even be considering running for local, state and federal offices, in order to enforce Article I – Section 8 power “to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”, in agreement with past Supreme Court affirmations that Congress and the American people have the “power to make rules for the admission of aliens and to exclude those who possess those characteristics which Congress has forbidden”. Moreover, Muslims can be stripped of their U.S. citizenship and deported, if they have actively fought and taken up arms against the U.S., according to many legal/Constitution experts: All those now standing and advocating for the deportation of Muslims, especially CAIR and MB members, understand that protecting U.S. interests and American citizens and maintaining American sovereignty, independence and freedom of action must be the primary, overriding concern of our nation and its leaders.

Islamists even see Thanksgiving as a time to advance their cause. In the morning, Islamists exploited the parade and in the evening, Islamists assembled in Illinois for the “Conference for Palestine in the U.S.” And one of their favorite evangelicals was there to join them.

The organizer of the event was American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) and it took place at Crowne Plaza O’Hare in Rosemont, Illinois from November 28 to December 1. The Islamist group often works with interfaith coalitions and one of its very partners is Presbyterian Reverend Donald Wagner, former director and current board member of Evangelicals for Middle East Understanding.

The AMP explicitly says that he “works internationally to educate Christians about the problems of Christian Zionism.” He falsely states that evangelicals support Israel only to trigger an Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ. To put it another way, Wagner and his group see them as the Christian equivalent of Ahmadinejad.

Wagner’s fellow speakers at the Thanksgiving Weekend conference are prominent Islamists whose backgrounds are simple to find. He and the other non-Muslim speakers like Max Blumenthal and Josh Ruebner, National Advocacy Director of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, have no excuse. They are either don’t care about the conference’s extremism or don’t care to know.

AMP Chairman Hatem Bazian is one of the Islamist co-founders of Zaytuna College in California. In 2004, he was videotaped calling for an “intifada” in America to “change fundamentally the political dynamics here.” He told Muslims to follow in the footsteps of Palestinians fighting Israel and Iraqis fighting U.S. forces.

Osama Abu Irshaid is a board member of the AMP. He used to be the editor for a Muslim Brotherhood front in the U.S. and legitimized Hamas’s attacks on Israel in 2010 as legally justifiable. He also has called Hamas “the resistance.”

Rashid Khalidi of Columbia University is well-known for his incendiary comments. He says he is a “severe critic” of Hamas but described the killing of Israeli soldiers as “resistance” in 2002. His wife also worked for the PLO when it was officially designated as a terrorist group by the U.S.

Abdelfattah Mourou is a co-founder of the Ennahda Party that currently leads Tunisia. The population that once elected it to power has since turned against it. It is essentially the Brotherhood’s branch there and he co-founded it with Rachid Ghannouchi, a prominent Islamist with a long record of extremism.

The U.S. government specifically listed him as an elite operative of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood as a member of its secret Palestine Committee. These operatives covertly advance the interests of Hamas through a web of fronts. He was even in a pro-Hamas band.

According to AMP, Mustapha is the chairman of the Quran Institute of the Chicago chapter of the Muslim American Society. He is also the President of the Shura of Islamic Family Counselors of America and chairman of the Illinois Council of Imams and Scholars. Several other positions are listed in his bio, reflecting the success the Brotherhood has had in building and infiltrating Islamic institutions in America.

They did it again. While we watched President Obama dodge the Syrian red line with Putin taking the lead, while we held our collective breaths as Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu and France’s President Hollande stalled negotiations over the Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the Islamists were at it again.

This time they cunningly swooped in and placed their wildest dreams into the massive immigration reform bill recently passed by the United States Senate.

Most Americans believe the bill is about amnesty, or a way to grant general pardon for political offenses such as disobedience to immigration laws. For example, most think it will give millions of Hispanic illegal aliens living in the U.S. amnesty. The bill goes far beyond obedience to law. Even pro-immigration Christian evangelicals say the bill is not amnesty. Then what is it?

The sweeping immigration reform bill, called the “Amnesty Bill” has Islamic inferences buried deep inside that should give Americans the shudders, and indeed, the entire world, especially United States allies. The bill reportedly includes a fast track to citizenship for immigrants from Muslim countries. U.S. President Obama hailed the passage of the bill as a critical step towards fixing America’s broken immigration system. While the “Gang of Eight” senators crafted the bill, an outsider, who just happens to be a Muslim Brotherhood associate, provided “treasured input,” according to a close associate of the Obama administration.

Fast tracking Muslims is not new to President Obama. Going back to 2010, Obama issued an executive order to fast-track immigrants from Islamic countries. In short, a person from a Muslim country could become a U.S. citizen in as little as ten weeks, with no I.D. and no declaration of fealty to the U.S. Constitution. The recent Senate immigration reform bill further expands the previously strict qualifications for immigration from Afghanistan and allows more family members to join admitted asylum seekers. In addition, the numbers allowed to arrive from Saudi Arabia is many times that of Afghanistan. If amendments were to be added to the immigration reform bill, more Muslim countries, such as Chechnya, could be added. Refugees from the Middle East could raise Muslim immigration numbers even higher. Could Muslims over take Hispanics?

Speaking of refugees, according to Amnesty International, Jordan is forcibly returning thousands of refugees back to Syria. Why? Because Jordan is experiencing economic and other pressures as a result of accepting so many refugees. Amnesty argues that Jordan’s pressures do not justify such violations of international law. Enter the United States as rescuer. Word is out that Obama intends to grant political asylum to large numbers of Syrian refugees (mostly Muslim). This global picture from Syria, to Russia, to Iran, to Israel to the United States is akin to a chess match, but with far-reaching implications and ramifications.

Who inside the Obama Administration helped to craft the shocking increases in Muslim immigration that is buried deep inside the text of the Senate bill? The input came from Mohammed Magdi, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Magdi is one of six Muslim policy advisors of the Obama administration with direct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

We used to believe that 2 + 2 = 4. In other words, we appealed to common sense. Does it make sense for the U.S. to admit large numbers of refugees and immigrants from Muslim countries, most of which would be practicing Sharia Law? It appears they could become U.S. citizens almost overnight. What a “checkmate” that would be for Islamists!

While the Middle East chess game continues and boils over with political intrigue and potential dangers to otherwise stable governments, the Muslim Brotherhood appears to be on the march with tentacles of influence reaching far beyond the Middle East. Taking countries from the inside out is their distinct goal. Egypt seems to have seen the light. What will it take to nudge the rest of the world into the dawn of truth, particularly United States citizens?

When immigration reform isn’t about reform; when amnesty isn’t about amnesty; when the rule of law is not the rule of law, it must be about something else. Could it be that the Muslim Brotherhood brothers already embedded inside the U.S. government are envisioning and planning their worldwide caliphate ruled by Sharia Law to be centered inside the United States of America? Amnesty, America and the Brotherhood. What would (will) America and the world look like with the Islamic flag flying over the White House?

The International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) has announced that it was scheduled to hold an outreach program at Shenandoah University in Virginia. According to the IIIT announcement, the program was to be held in cooperation with the National Endowment for the Humanities, an arm of the US government:

International Institute of Islamic Thought

Thursday, October 24, 2013 The International Institute of Islamic Thought and The Fairfax Institute will conduct an outreach program at Shenandoah University on Thursday October 24, 2013. The program -which starts from 2 to 5 p.m. in the Brandt Student Center (703 University Dr., Winchester, VA, 22601)- includes an information booth featuring Abbas Baghdadi, an Arabic calligrapher and book exhibit in the main lobby. Dr. Daoud Nassimi, who will teach ‘Introduction to Islam’ during the spring 2014 semester, will introduce a documentary film, ‘The Rise and Fall of Islamic Spain,’ at 2 p.m. in the BSC, Room 118. This program is offered in cooperation with the National Endowment for the Humanities and presented by Shenandoah’s Muslim Student Association, Student Life’s Intercultural Programs, the College of Arts & Sciences and the Alson H. Smith Jr. Library. The program is open to the university and Winchester communities.

In 2007, IIIT entered into a partnership with Shenandoah University described as follows:

IIIT vice president Dr. Jamal Bazrinji and dean of Shenandoah University’s College of Arts and Sciences Dr. Calvin Allen, Jr. signed a Memorandum of Agreement on June 13 to initiate and promote academic cooperation between the two institutions. The signing took place at IIIT’s office in Herndon, Virginia. The agreement calls for cooperation in “course development, educational programs, and research with a goal of promoting an understanding of Islam and Muslims in America, and Islamic civilization and culture, “based on “the principles of equality and reciprocal benefit.” Also agreed upon was the first cooperative venture under this agreement. IIIT’s instructional division, The Fairfax Institute, will designate an instructor to co-teach with Dr. Allen a course on Islamic civilization. Shenandoah University is a growing liberal Arts academic institution aiming at extending its program beyond its campus and establishing partnerships to do so. Through its research affiliates in the U.S. and in many parts of the world, IIIT will contribute to the University’s efforts to build relationships and programs in line with its objective to train “global citizens”. These could include study abroad programs as well as additional courses on Shenandoah’s campuses in Winchester and Leesburg as well as on The Fairfax Institute’s campus in Herndon.

In August 2011, the Shenandoah Dean of Arts and Sciences spoke at an IIIT Iftar event that also included Governor John Sununu, former Chief of Staff at the White House for President George Bush, Sr.

The International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) describes itself as “a private, non-profit, academic, cultural and educational institution, concerned with general issues of Islamic thought and education” and using the slogan “Towards Islamization of Knowledge and Reform of Islamic Thought.” The concept for IIIT was developed at a meeting held in Lugano, Switzerland that was attended by many luminaries of the Global Muslim Brotherhood including Youssef Qaradawi. IIIIT was founded in the U.S. in 1980 by U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leaders including Iraqi-born Jamal Barzinji and Hisham Altalib who wished to promote the Islamization of Knowledge as conceived by Ismail Al-Faruqi and who were also early leaders of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). A1991 internal document of the US Muslim Brotherhood, introduced as evidence in the holy Land Foundation trial, included IIIT in “a list of our organizations and organizations of our friends.” IIIT was associated with the now defunct SAAR Foundation, a network of Islamic organizations located in Northern Virginia that was raided by the Federal government in March 2002 in connection with the financing of terrorism and both organizations had been under investigation at that time by the U.S. Justice Department until at least mid 2007. The organization appeared to have withdrawn from public view following the 2002 raids but seems to be enjoying a renaissance of late. The IIIT Council of Scholars includes a number of important individuals from the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood such as Ingrid Mattson, the former President of ISNA. IIIT has a network of affiliates located in Europe, Africa, the MIddle East, and Asia and is heavily involved with publishing and promoting publications by Global Muslim Brotherhood leaders including Youssef Qaradawi who, according to one source, serves as an IIIT trustee.

WND: The Obama administration allowed into government agencies Islamic groups and activists tied to the Muslim Brotherhood who now influence U.S. anti-terrorism policies and endanger the nation, charges a newly released book.

In “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office,” New York Times bestselling authors Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott document Obama not only aided the rise to power of Islamic extremist groups in the Middle East but ushered likeminded extremists into the gates of the White House, with Muslim Brotherhood groups serving on important national security advisory boards.

The book further raises questions about whether the Obama administration exposed national security information to U.S. enemies through Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, who has deep personal and family associations with Islamic extremists and even terrorist organizations, according to Klein and Elliott.

Muslim planet

Klein and Elliott warn that while there are various Muslim Brotherhood factions and political branches, each share the goal of establishing a comprehensive Muslim world order by means of a long-term, multiple-stage process, with the end game, the book alleges, being a planet run according to Islamic law.

In the United States, the Brotherhood quietly founded multiple organizations and networks, mostly funded by Persian Gulf states, according to “Impeachable Offenses.”

These groups seek influence by lobbying sympathetic members of Congress and infiltrating organizations aligned with various Palestinian and Islamic causes. Identifying these organizations and exposing the agendas of the activists who run them is often difficult, notes the authors, since the groups repeatedly deny ties to the Brotherhood, especially after the 9/11 attacks.

Muslim Brotherhood in the White House

Speaking in February 2010 at what became a controversial question-and-answer session with Muslim law students at New York University, current CIA director John Brennan announced the Obama administration was working to calibrate policies in the fight against terrorism that ensure Americans are “never” profiled.

At the session, Brennan stated that seeing a percentage of terrorists released by the United States return to terrorism “isn’t that bad,” since the recidivism rate for inmates in the U.S. prison system is higher.

He also criticized parts of the Bush administration’s response to 9/11 as a “reaction some people might say was over the top in some areas,” that “in an overabundance of caution, [we] implemented a number of security measures and activities that upon reflection … after the heat of the battle has died down a bit, we say they were excessive.”

While Brennan’s remarks drew scrutiny in the blogosphere and in some conservative media outlets, Klein and Elliott note that perhaps the biggest story remains untold – his controversial speech was arranged by a Muslim Brotherhood-tied group that has deep ties not only with other Brotherhood fronts but to the White House and national security agencies.

Brennan’s NYU session was organized by the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA, according to the group’s website. ISNA, whose members asked Brennan scores of questions during the event, stated the meeting was intended to initiate a “dialogue between government officials and Muslim American leaders to explore issues of national security.”

ISNA was founded in 1981 by the Saudi-funded Muslim Students Association, which itself was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood. The two groups are still partners.

ISNA is known for its promotion of strict Saudi-style Islam in mosques throughout the U.S.

Islam scholar Stephen Schwartz describes ISNA as “one of the chief conduits through which the radical Saudi form of Islam passes into the United States.”

According to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, ISNA “is a radical group hiding under a false veneer of moderation.”

Brennan is not the only Obama official to address the radical ISNA. Klein and Elliott relate that in May 2011, Obama’s then-deputy national security adviser, Denis McDonough, was hosted by an ISNA-affiliated mosque to give a speech touted as part of a White House initiative to reach out to Muslims. McDonough is currently Obama’s chief of staff.

In another of scores of examples cited in “Impeachable Offenses,”in July 2011 Obama’s faith adviser, Eboo Patel, spoke at the main event of a three-day convention held by the Muslim Brotherhood-founded Muslim Students Association.

Patel appeared on a panel alongside Tariq Ramadan, grandson of the notorious founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Siraj Wahhaj, who was named as a possible coconspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Wahhaj has defended the convicted WTC bomb plotters and has urged the Islamic takeover of America.

When the State Department announced early in October that it was cutting hundreds of millions in military and other aid to Egypt, it was yet another manifestation of Barack Obama’s unstinting support for the Muslim Brotherhood,a support that has already thrown Egypt back into the Russian orbit. The aid cut was essentially giving the Egyptian people a choice between Muslim Brotherhood rule and economic collapse. Nothing else could have been expected from Obama, who has been a Brotherhood man from the beginning.

Obama’s support for the Brotherhood goes back to the beginning of his presidency. He even invited Ingrid Mattson, then-president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), to offer a prayer at the National Cathedral on his first Inauguration Day – despite the fact that ISNA has admitted its ties to the Brotherhood. The previous summer, federal prosecutors rejected a request from ISNA to remove its unindicted co-conspirator status. Obama didn’t ask Mattson to explain ISNA’s links to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. On the contrary: he sent his Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett to be the keynote speaker at ISNA’s national convention in 2009.

Even worse, in April 2009, Obama appointed Arif Alikhan, the deputy mayor of Los Angeles, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development at the Department of Homeland Security. Just two weeks before he received this appointment, Alikhan (who once called the jihad terror group Hizballah a “liberation movement”) participated in a fundraiser for the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC). Like ISNA, MPAC has links to the Muslim Brotherhood. In a book entitledIn Fraternity: A Message to Muslims in America, coauthor Hassan Hathout, a former MPAC president, is identified as “a close disciple of the late Hassan al-Banna of Egypt.” The MPAC-linked magazine The Minaret spoke of Hassan Hathout’s closeness to al-Banna in a 1997 article: “My father would tell me that Hassan Hathout was a companion of Hassan al-Banna….Hassan Hathout would speak of al-Banna with such love and adoration; he would speak of a relationship not guided by politics or law but by a basic sense of human decency.”

Al-Banna, of course, was the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, an admirer of Hitler and a leader of the movement to (in his words) “push the Jews into the sea.”

Terror researcher Steven Emerson’s Investigative Project has documented MPAC’s indefatigable and consistent opposition to virtually every domestic anti-terror initiative; its magazine The Minaret has dismissed key counterterror operations as part of “[t]he American crusade against Islam and Muslims.” For his part, while Alikhan was deputy mayor of Los Angeles, he blocked a Los Angeles Police Department project to assemble data about the ethnic makeup of mosques in the Los Angeles area. This was not an attempt to conduct surveillance of the mosques or monitor them in any way. LAPD Deputy Chief Michael P. Downing explained that it was actually an outreach program: “We want to know where the Pakistanis, Iranians and Chechens are so we can reach out to those communities.” But Alikhan and other Muslim leaders claimed that the project manifested racism and “Islamophobia,” and the LAPD ultimately discarded all plans to study the mosques.

The core disagreement presented here is about whether Islamists are adversaries of the West or suitable allies. If one believes that Islamists and their ideology is not a problem, then one will be dismissive of any facts about the influence of the US Muslim Brotherhood. For this camp, the threat is from irreconcilable violent Islamists like al-Qaeda and the solution is from reconciliation with supposedly non-violent Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood. This camp feels that the root cause of terrorism and Islamic extremism is not the Islamist ideology, but legitimate gripes against Western policy.

In our opinion, it is better to look to the public words of Islamists, like those shown in our documentaries, and the declaration of the 1991 US Muslim Brotherhood memo that its “work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

Mauro: Why don’t you support the marginalization of the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliated groups?

Elibiary: President Obama has certainly expressed publicly the importance of strategic engagement for our national interest in multiple speeches, and to a lesser extent, so has Senator McCain, whom I endorsed on FOX News early in the 2008 election as a Texas Republican state convention delegate. So this is an area where I think our government’s policy is ahead of where the national political discourse is in the conservative media.

Having served for more than a decade in various Republican Party of Texas positions, as well as with Dallas-based roots in the conservative movement going back two decades, I clearly see that Christian social conservatives as well as Jewish conservatives concerned about Israel’s future are simply fearful to the point of psychological paranoia on how to deal with the rising Islamic movements across the globe.

It’s my hope that interviews like this will help address concerns and help elevate our national political discourse around these topics to catch up with national realities.

The most important part of this section is Mr. Elibiary’s influence as a Republican Party official and member of the Secretary’s Homeland Security Advisory Council. This is why we felt it was important to publish a comprehensive dialogue with him. Elibiary states that he was a Texas Republican state convention delegate in 2008 and has served the Republican Party of Texas for over a decade in various capacities. The Dept. of Homeland Security Council that he serves on has made over 100 recommendations and, by his estimate, about 90% have been implemented or are being implemented.

Mauro: As a member of the DHS Secretary’s Homeland Security Advisory Council, what recommendations have you made?

Elibiary (cont’d): The Secretary’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) has approved over 100 official recommendations during the past four years and about 90% have either been already implemented or are in the process of implementation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As a member of the HSAC, I voted along with my colleagues to pass on all those recommendations to Secretary Napolitano for consideration. The Secretary then signs off on what she agrees with and orders its implementation.

Those recommendations cover many areas that DHS works in from counter-terrorism to cyber-security, from immigration enforcement by ICE to disaster resiliency by FEMA, from border enforcement by CBP to Infrastructure Protection by NPPD. An example of a direct recommendation the HSAC offered and the Secretary approved was the cancellation of the post-9/11 color-coded terrorism alert system we used to see everywhere and its replacement with a more effective National Terrorism Advisory System.

Elibiary’s influence is apparent in the Countering Violent Extremism training guidelines issued by the Dept. of Homeland Security. The Clarion Project published an analysis of those guidelines in May, pointing out how the guidelines warn against training related to the US Muslim Brotherhood and non-violent Islamist tactics. The guidelines were apparently crafted under the guidance of Elibiary, the President of the Islamic Society of North America, and other supporters of the US Muslim Brotherhood network.

To summarize, the Dept. of Homeland Security basically relied upon Islamist-friendly advisors to draft training guidelines and these guidelines inevitably ended up Islamist-friendly. Remarkably, the President of ISNA had a hand in developing standards that would leave counter-terrorism personnel ignorant of his own organization’s Brotherhood origins.

Elibiary (cont’d): The area that has earned me the most amount of anti-Islamist media criticism has been my role assisting DHS and the broader administration craft a framework and later a strategy for Countering Violent Extremism (CVE). I helped write parts of the initial HSAC-CVE document President Barack Hussein Obama was briefed on in the Oval Office, and some in the anti-Islamist media were upset with the approach we took.

Honestly speaking, these CVE recommendations have enjoyed mainstream professional support across the law enforcement and intelligence communities, not least because they enhance homeland security’s effectiveness in a constitutionally-compliant manner as I explained in my post-Boston marathon attack op-ed in the Washington Post. While there is still more work to do across the Homeland Security Enterprise to improve CVE coordination, like many practitioners in the field, I am happy with the progress achieved thus far.

Mauro: Do you have any concluding statements?

Elibiary (cont’d): Rising to become the youngest American to ever serve on a prestigious body like the Secretary’s Homeland Security Advisory Council is frankly a testament to the strength and resilience of our nation’s meritocracy. With too many luminaries and nationally prominent policymakers to list here, including Governor Mitt Romney himself, having served or continuing to serve on the Council; I’m naturally humbled at having been given the opportunity to serve and interact with some of our nation’s top national security officials the past few years.

Personally I hold no hatred towards any conservative, anti-Islamist or pro-Israel activists who’ve attacked me over the past few years as somehow a subversive threat to our country’s national security. I’ve generously given hundreds of media interviews, testified before Congress and met with many national security officials from both the Bush and Obama Administrations. So at this point I’m about as security and bi-partisan politically vetted as anyone can become.

I’ve often hoped that a day would come when an honest and frank conversation can begin between conservatives concerned about Islamism/Political Islam and Muslims concerned about anti-Muslim bigotry (i.e. Islamophobia). It is my sincere hope that this interview helps conservatives concerned about these issues reciprocate by opening the door for a civil dialog with mainstream American Muslims to move our country forward and close the door on the HLF related past.

Focusing on the behavioral indicators of ideologically-motivated violent extremism, as I have advocated, is an opportunity for the conservative movement to broaden its base, safeguard the US Constitution, advance effective national security policy and counter the scourge of bigotry. Now that it is clear to all those who have monitored the HLF-related investigations and trials, that the issue of the unindicted co-conspirators is now a CLOSED matter and there will NOT be an HLF 2.0 trial, perhaps now is the time for us, especially conservatives, to consider launching that long-delayed constructive public dialogue about where our nation goes from here in 2013.

The question readers must ask themselves is this: Is it appropriate for the DHS to have a pro-Muslim Brotherhood official who has close ties to identified US Muslim Brotherhood entities?

In this series, he stands by his opposition to the prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation, a US Muslim Brotherhood entity that was led by his long-time friend. Furthermore, he admits to having helped “safeguard” these US Muslim Brotherhood entities. During Elibiary’s tenture at DHS, the Department has issued training guidelines that protect these entities from scrutiny and eliminate education about the non-violent, legal tactics they use to promote their Islamist agenda. The counter-terrorism personnel instructed under these guidelines will often serve for decades.

On a broader level, this series isn’t just about Elibiary. It’s about the wisdom of embracing the Muslim Brotherhood as a “moderate” partner overseas or the US Muslim Brotherhood at home as expert advisors.

I want to thank Mr. Elibiary for the great deal of time and effort he put into this dialogue. In today’s news environment, it is a rarity to find such a truly substantive discussion of a contentious topic. Now, with both sides presented, it is up to the reader to decide the validity of our opposing views.

It was once said that Politics and War make for strange bedfellows. When it comes to the Republican Party establishment, one such example is Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR). Norquist’s prominence today very much includes a ride on Ronald Reagan’s coattails. The 40th President’s name is invoked in the very first sentence of Grover’s bio on ATR’s website.

Grover Norquist: Wants Cruz to be quiet.

Like Senator John McCain (RINO-AZ), when it comes to the fight waged by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) over Obamacare recently, Norquist would rather fight Cruz than the Democrats, despite the fact that Cruz has been fighting against what the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice said was a tax. In an interview with Nora Caplan-Bricker of the left-wing New Republic, Norquist mocked Cruz with analogies that put him on the side of the Republican establishment.

The establishment’s disgust for Cruz is not about disagreeing with his strategy; it’s about Cruz’s ability to unleash the power of the conservative base. It’s an engaged contingent of America that the establishment – including Norquist – fears. There are many reasons why the Republican establishment wants to defeat this group – many reasons. One such reason is what it doesn’t want to be exposed about itself.

That something very much includes Norquist.

While the New Republic’s Caplan-Bricker provided the ATR President a platform to attack Cruz in 2013, that publication’s Franklin Foer published an article entitled “Fevered Pitch” two months after 9/11 in 2001 that – in hindsight – demonstrates that Norquist was a major player in granting Muslim Brotherhood access to the Bush White House.

Franklin Foer: Time bomb article in 2001 implicates Norquist.

You see, Norquist was the man perhaps most responsible for the George W. Bush administration’s decision to engage the Muslim Brotherhood’s front groups in the U.S. instead of exposing them.

ON THE AFTERNOON of September 26, George W. Bush gathered 15 prominent Muslim- and Arab-Americans at the White House. With cameras rolling, the president proclaimed that “the teachings of Islam are teachings of peace and good.” It was a critically important moment, a statement to the world that America’s Muslim leaders unambiguously reject the terror committed in Islam’s name.

Unfortunately, many of the leaders present hadn’t unambiguously rejected it. To the president’s left sat Dr. Yahya Basha, president of the American Muslim Council, an organization whose leaders have repeatedly called Hamas “freedom fighters.” Also in attendance was Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, who on the afternoon of September 11 told a Los Angeles public radio audience that “we should put the State of Israel on the suspect list.” And sitting right next to President Bush was Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Islamic Society of North America, who last fall told a Washington crowd chanting pro-Hezbollah slogans, “America has to learn if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come.” Days later, after a conservative activist confronted Karl Rove with dossiers about some of Bush’s new friends, Rove replied, according to the activist, “I wish I had known before the event took place.” {emphasis ours}

As mentioned previously, there are many reasons why the Republican establishment – arguably run by Rove today – wants Cruz defeated but all of this history becoming part of the American consciousness has definitely got to be one of them.

This Grover has nothing to hide.

When is the last time you heard anyone from the Republican establishment in general or the Bush administration in particular, warn about Muslim Brotherhood groups in the U.S.?